Posted on 01/20/2016 7:17:07 AM PST by Isara
Why doesn't the establishment get behind Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) to stop Donald Trump?
I've been asking this question for months. As I wrote back in December:
The establishment can't stand Cruz because they believe he unfairly rips establishment Republicans for insufficient ideological purity. They think Cruz doesn't understand the necessary deals that must be cut in politics in order to "get things done"-they think he's more interested in posturing than in achieving practical policies to help Americans. They will have to put such concerns aside if they want to defeat Trump.
It's clearer now than it was then that Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL) isn't going to be able to stop Trump. A new poll from ARG in New Hampshire today shows Trump on top with 27 percent of the likely vote - but then abominable Ohio Governor John Kasich following with 20 percent, followed by Rubio at 10 percent, Cruz at 9 percent, New Jersey Governor Chris Christie at 9 percent, and Florida Governor Jeb Bush at 8 percent. That means, effectively speaking, that if Cruz wins Iowa, Rubio would finish no better than fourth, and perhaps lower than that.
Which explodes his primary strategy. Tim Alberta of National Review sums up that strategy here:
The strategy, dubbed "3-2-1" by some who have been briefed on it, forecasts a sequence in which Rubio takes third place in Iowa on February 1, finishes second in New Hampshire on February 9, and wins South Carolina on February 20. From there, Rubio would be well-positioned in the long haul to win a plurality of voters, and ultimately a majority of delegates, in a three-way contest against Donald Trump and Ted Cruz.
This scenario is highly unlikely. And John Kasich isn't going to carry any Southern states - he'll lose to both Trump and Cruz, in all likelihood. So why doesn't the establishment get behind Cruz?
Because the establishment would prefer Trump. They've been holding out, of course. They've been complaining endlessly about Trump's candidacy, because he has been holding back some of their favored nominee possibilities. But if given the choice between Trump and Cruz, they'd pick Trump. Just days ago, National Review reported that House GOP members find Trump more malleable and less polarizing than Cruz:
The developing feeling among House Republicans? Donald Trump is preferable to Ted Cruz. "If you look at Trump's actual policies, they're pretty thin. There's not a lot of meat there," says one Republican member in Ryan's inner circle, who requested anonymity to speak frankly about the two front-runners as leadership has carefully avoided doing all week. If Trump were to get the nomination, he would "be looking to answer the question: 'Where's the beef?' And we will have that for him," says the member.
Trump, in other words, has no ideas; Cruz has plenty, and the establishment doesn't like them. It's clear that Cruz has no sway in the Senate - Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell wouldn't even push a resolution proclaiming Cruz's presidential eligibility to help Cruz this year.
The establishment has always preferred northeastern Republicanism - soft on social issues, not averse to crony capitalism, friendly to Democrats. That sounds a lot more like Trump than Cruz. The only thing they truly can't stand about Trump is his immigration position, but they're willing to overlook that, since Cruz has largely mirrored Trump on immigration. Establishment Republicans believe that Republicans can only win if they win back blue collar workers and minority voters - and if they can't have Rubio to win Hispanics, they'll take Trump to win blacks and Rust Belt workers. As Reuters reports:
About one in 10 Americans who plan to cast a vote this election will do so for the first time in years, if ever, and Trump holds a decided edge with them, according to polling by Reuters/Ipsos....Cruz captures just 3.4 percent of these voters. And Senator Marco Rubio of Florida snags only 4 percent.
Trump may alienate voters in current polls, but he also draws the so-called Reagan Democrats. A Mercury Analytics poll released last weeks shows approximately 20 percent of Democrats would consider bolting the party to back Trump.
Trump is actually far closer to Mitt Romney as a candidate than he is to pure Constitutional conservatism. And the establishment likes that better than Ted Cruz's brand of purity.
You really know how to win friends and influence neighbors don't you? And you think that alienating and offending at most the people who read your nonsensical proclamations helps your guy how?
“So, if not Cruz, if not Palin, who will Trump pick?”
I think the odds now are in favor of a Trump nomination...not in the bag, but looking stronger by the day.
Due to the birther fight, I can’t see how Trump can pick Cruz.
IMHO, Trump is a bottom-line guy. He will look over his options and pick the one that will give him the greatest chance to get to 270 electoral votes. This choice will not include the 3 from Alaska. Putting aside the large blue states of CA, NY, and IL, I think he will target the large swing states of FL, PA, and OH for his VP choice...I can’t think of anyone from PA who can help him. So, I think he will choose either Rubio or Kasich...probably Rubio who can help him with the Hispanic vote...then again, he could also pick Oprah!
I'm sure the Trump supporters would immediately change their opinions of the two.
The Nominee doesn't have to pick another candidate, right?
I’m not trying to influence them. You can’t influence a zealot. You can only expose them.
+1000
You need to look in the mirror if you want to visualize the meaning of the word zealot. You said, “At this point, if you're even a tacit Trump supporter, you're pro-establishment, pro-cronyism, pro-NY values.” A “tacit” supporter is by definition not a zealot. I will gladly vote for either Cruz or Trump in the general election... does that make me a “zealot”? I want to defeat the Democrats.
I can understand why you have been posting a lot of crazy stuff this last week. It was exciting as Cruz reached the pinnacle of his support. But he was kind of flying under the radar and now a bunch of negative stuff has wounded his campaign. It has a better chance of recovering if you and other “zealots” don't offend everyone under the sun who might just be on the same side as you.
You didn’t watch the video, did you?
A narcissistic sadist is a different type of narcissism.
No, sadism is a key part of malignant narcissism. Malignant narcissism is not a new concept that I need to watch a youtube video to describe to me.
He will makes deals for the good of the country.
If you already have, thank you.
In their day, the GOPe were the loyalists. The English in England were the Democrats, and they told the loyalists what was what, and the loyalists said, yes, you are in charge. Might I have a spot of tea?
If you already have, thank you.
Very true. One of the latest things in the study of American history is the experience of the Loyalists.
When I first began reading their words, I could not help but think of the GOPe.
Where would be today had the Colonial GOPe had been successful over our Founders?
Shudder.
A new tactic, and so transparent it pains me to ever read it. Yea, that’s the ticket, say the ‘establishment’ is behind him and bam, all those fired up voters who detest the establishment will bolt from him!
How I wish there was a pause button, so much silly garbage written everyday, it’s mind numbing. While they sling their arrows back and forth, real people are suffering all over, but hey, let’s just keep beating the same drum. The list of idiots just gets longer and longer....
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.